What Keeps You Off of Windows?

J. J. Ramsey asks: "schnell has already asked the question What's Keeping You On Windows? It seems only fair to ask the opposite question. For those of you who have elected to not use Windows, what keeps you away from it? Concerns about stability? Security? Dislike of Microsoft's business practices? Or are you simply a fan of your chosen platform and just don't care about Windows one way or the other?" Might recent events sway your decision to keep Microsoft's premier software offering off of your computer?

Comments

I live without Windows

[Quebec]

What keeps me off Windows is mainly because I don't want to be
locked-up in some savage immoral decommoditizing scheme.

The practice of scrambling and obfuscating the standards to insure
the failure of the competition is so much a threat to my eyes that
losing some compatibility and some discutable features for not dealing
with this is more then acceptable.

Death to close source, death to DRMs, long live the Open Source.

Re:I live without Windows

[John Courtland]

The goal of any business is to profit. Not to make the competition fail through shady practices. If the competition fails because you made such a good product, that's one story. If they fail because you illegally cornered the market using underhanded licensing tactics, that's another all together.

Re:I live without Windows

[squiggleslash]

Why is this insightful? Since when has the goal of any business been the failure of its competition?

The goal of a business is to make a profit, preferably the largest it can. In many cases, a business cannot thrive without competition, and even if it still considers competition a problem, it's goal is not to eliminate it.

Re:I live without Windows

[Short Circuit]

There are two reasons to have a free-enterprise economy. First, people can earn a living on merit. Second, consumers get decent products at a decent price.

Unfortunately, some (though admittedly few) controls have to be in place to gaurantee the latter. The FDA exists so that we don't get fed shoddy food and medicines. The FCC exists in part so that radio stations don't fry all the electronic equipment within a ten mile radius. The FTC exists in part to keep both consumers and shareholders from getting shafted.

Re:I live without Windows

[Anonymous Coward]

• Being able to do a network boot (fully diskless workstation) served from a RAIDed fileserver over a gigabit LAN
• Being able to tweak the system beyond belief
• Having everything 'just work' once it's set up
• My work environment is in Linux as well

Notice that I haven't said anything about cost. In fact, I probably spend more per year on distro stuff than I would if using Windows.

For many of us, Windows can't do what's required.

Re:I live without Windows

[Phillup]

Sounds to me like you can't tell the difference between morality and legality.

They are not the same.

Re:I live without Windows

[shaitand]

You might have missed it, the law said what Microsoft is doing is illegal.

Surely nobody would question it's immoral.

Re:I live without Windows

[shaitand]

You've got it backwards jack. Business exists to make profit. Their other stated goals are merely how they go about making profit.

Ford's goal is to make affordable cars so they can sell them in larger numbers, thus cutting out competition and making more money.

Since when does the marketing literature (ie stated goals) have much to do with reality?

Re:I live without Windows

[plugger]

Are you equating lack of education with laziness?

Perhaps if there were nothing but well paid professionals on the planet, you might realise where your food comes from, who packs it, who drives it to your local store, and who takes your garbage away when you've finished with it. Or are they too uneducated to deal with your trash?

Re:I live without Windows

[John Courtland]

Incorrect assumption. When someone starts a business, they don't say, "oh, I want to lose money, but help people." Well, not unless it's part of a bigger picture in order to get tax breaks... Regardless, a business makes money. If it doesn't, it will no longer exist. That's all you should conclude from my statement, no more no less.

Just beacause I state something simply, doesn't mean there isn't more to the picture. A lot of slashdotters seem to fail to come to this conclusion, and it's pretty damn annoying.

Re:I live without Windows

[Captain Splendid]

When someone starts a business, they don't say, "oh, I want to lose money, but help people." Well, not unless it's part of a bigger picture in order to get tax breaks...

I don't see why business has to be about money and nothing else. Of course money's an important consideration, but what about providing the best goods/services/whatever, or committing a certain percentage of resources to charitable causes? What about starting your own business and forsaking steady pay for doing what you love?

Not to mention there's making money and then there's making obscene amounts of money and wasting it. Companies laying off workers while simultaneously awarding mutli-million salaries and bonuses to their CEOs are, as far as I'm concerned, failures.

Regardless, a business makes money. If it doesn't, it will no longer exist.

Unless the government bails you out or takes the hit (too many instances to bloody mention.)

And then, you've completely forgotten to take into account businesses that have been wiped out by greed, adverse tax law, predatory competitors or government regulation, and not because they weren't making a profit.

Re:I live without Windows

[t1m0r4n]

They have blocked OEMs from putting out useful products (e.g. dual-boot computers).

You list this, I assume, as a bad thing. Selling dual-boot boxes is just silly and confusing. Back in the day, a cousin of mine was an OS/2 fanatic. He talked another cousin into buying a computer with Windows and OS/2. When I inquired how the recient liked OS/2, the reply was "I've opened that _program_ a couple times, but I couldn't figure out what it's supposed to do". I highly suspect that far too many geeks would recommend Linux dual-boots, and the results would be the same. Ignorant users would assume they knew Linux because they had it on their computer, although they never really understood what it was, found Windows far more useful because it did Office and games etc, and they would just disregard Linux in the future. I find it far better to let them find Linux on their own because of Windows problems, or go with an all Linux system with plenty of training.

P.S. Just started reading this thread, and I couldn't help but wonder. There are ~1,400 comments, yet I doubt there are 1,400 readers of slashdot who use Linux exclusively at home. I find it kinda funny.

Re:I live without Windows

[realdpk]

"I don't see why business has to be about money and nothing else. Of course money's an important consideration, but what about providing the best goods/services/whatever, or committing a certain percentage of resources to charitable causes?"

You can provide the best services and give away money all you want, but when a competitor comes in and doesn't, and you start losing business, you'll have to cut back and possibly close and/or sell out.

One thing

[DougMackensie]

Sanity

Re:One thing

[Cromac]

The problem comes from my friends. One morning, I sit down in front of my PC, boot it. Something comes up full-screen, immediately. I've been spywared. By no fault of my own. My less-than-savvy friends have just cost me an hour of my time downloading, updating and running AdAware/SpyBot S&D.

That's not a fault of Windows that's your responsibility for allowing your friends to use your machine with an account that has permissions to do such things.

Would you blame Ford if your friend borrowed your car and wrecked it?

Re:One thing

[txviking]

What keeps me off Windows ?

The fact that I have no idea what kind of trojan horse of timebomb windows might be. In a world of open network, I have the feeling that it is my ethical obligation to know what my computer is running. And if I am unable to check that out myself, that there are independant experts that can check it out.

I believe it is too easy to trust one corporation. We don't even do that with governments. There are checks and balances, separation of powers etc. Where are the separation of powers and checks and balances concerning Windows ?

I believe in self-determinism. In my own decision when to upgrade my hardware (not because some software has an exploit and it is not fixed anymore, and the new version does not run on it). I believe in self-determination without a nanny that needs to be informed when I change my hardware configuration. I believe it is nobody's business, to put cpu-ids in my text-documents.

I believe in ownership. I believe it is my right to own what I buy. To sell what I own, and to fix it when it is broken, or to go to an independent garage to fix my software instead of the manufacture from where I bought it from

I believe in my right of protection from illegal search and seizure. I do not think anybody needs to know what my hardware is, or what software I have on my machine when I put in a patch.

I believe in the freedom of speech. I do not believe it is anybody's right to forsake my ownership of something that I bought and paid for, because I use it as a tool to opine something that is not liked by somebody else who in return can legally use the EULA to revoke my right of ownership for what I have paid for.

I believe in the right to use my possesion to make a profit in my business endeavors. I do not think that if I buy something, I can not rent it out for money.

This are only 7 of many issues that I have with Windows. I don't care if Windows would be the best product in the world, far ahead of anything else. I would have an issue with what I have to sell of my soul (or rights) to enjoy it. I am very happy, that I have a choice and can choose to use something else that does not deny my inalienable rights that are dear to me

However, like with lots of things, this is my choice, and I would fight for the freedom of others to choose differently while I hope they would stand by me in the same way to fight for my freedom of choice in this issue

Re:One thing

[iserlohn]

Good for you. However, if you have been upgrading hardware or installing software, Windows does break, and more often than not, the breakage is hidden somewhere deep down inside the system.

The main problem with windows, as I see it, is the over dependance of the system registry. Corruption of the registry is fatal to the system. Even if the registry is not currpted, there are tons of keys hidden deep down within the heirarchy , many of which is not obvious what they control, and a lot of them auto-generated values with some arbitarty ID as keys! You can't get any user unfriendly than this.

Evan though the system configuration files of Unix and Linux system are diverse in format and not unified or centralized, almost all configuration is in a text based format that is easy to read and for the most part, well documented. If you run into a setting which you need lookup, you can mostly do it with a "man config.conf".

Re:One thing

[rjstanford]

But hey, who even said that a locked down 'user' account (not even Power User) would have been any less dangerous? Spyware could still install itself to any folder within that users own Documents and Settings folder. Registry keys under HKEY_USER could still be modified.

Which is 100% true on UNIX systems also. It just happens to be true that most spyware type apps (the vast majority of which are actively and willingly downloaded by their end-users) are written for Windows. If more people were using UNIX, you'd get these apps for UNIX as well. There's no technical superiority here, just user frustration (ie: this app (which has bad side effects) isn't available for my OS so I can't download it and see the pretty cursors (or whatever)).

Re:One thing

[Phillup]

My main win2k install was actualy done in 2000. None of my other machines have ever been reinstalled, and they've been running fine.

Congratulations. Not everyone is so blessed.

What keeps me from running Windows?

When I turn it on, I wonder if it will actually boot.

When I turn it off, I wonder if it will actually shutdown.

In between the two, I wonder what the hell it is doing.

Simple... I want my computer to do what *I* tell it.

Re:One thing

[Hizonner]

If Toyota sold a car that would prevent my friends from wrecking it when I lent it to them, whereas Ford cars were easily wrecked by non-expert drivers, then, all other things being equal, I would buy the Toyota.

Re:One thing

[Gortbusters.org]

Hey, spyware/adware gets in under the radar of normal usage.

Ever go to a non-techie's computer... it's probably infested with this shit. This is not the fault of the user, it's the fault of things like the browser or outlook [express] or whatever that makes these things so easy to do.

I've never installed something unknowingly using linux, or even firefox on XP for that matter.

Re:One thing

[4of12]

Which is 100% true on UNIX systems also.

Don't know about UNIX systems where you live, but none of mine have /etc/rc world writable:)

The Cost

[blackhelicopter]

It costs too much in buying it, maintaining it, getting new anti-virus software, fighting with it... I just don't have the money and more importantly time...

Mac OS X

[pmj]

Mac OS X.

Re:Mac OS X

[alfredo]

Me too. I only mess with the system when I want to, not when I have to.

Anyway, windows is butt ugly.

Quick

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone mod this article flamebait!

The price is the sticking point

[Wellmont]

The price, almost absolutely the price....it is just to expensive to keep up with windows releases for a college student. Microsoft is really doing a disservice by selling software for hundreds of dollars and sometimes even thousands.

Re:The price is the sticking point

[fornaxsw]

Since when do college students pay for software?

Re:The price is the sticking point

[KrispyKringle]

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. While my current desktop was custom-built, previously--and probably much of the time in the future--I bought and will buy machines from an OEM. It's simply faster, easier, and generally as cheap, if not cheaper (of course, with your own custom build, you get what you want, you know the components are good, and so forth). But I don't really enjoy hardware enough to get a thrill from building a machine.

Anyway, when I get an OEM, I get Windows. Additionally, at my university, I can get Windows licenses for free (site license) with minimal hassle. So price is hardly a sticking point (of course, I have become used to free software enough that having to mess about with license authentication and so forth is still a big hassle).

On top of that, I know literally nobody, I think, who does not pirate (other than myself). So if the vast majority of students are willing and able to get Windows for free, legally or not, why do some choose not to? Perhaps you are unwilling to pirate Windows, and I commend you, but likely it came with your computer (and if not, the educational version of XP is under $100).

I personally use Linux, FreeBSD,and MacOS X because I prefer the environment. I've been working on Windows machines in the lab I work in, and it's painful. For development, I've heard VisualStudio is supposed to be great. But I'd say give me grep and Emacs any day. I've tried Cygwin. It's installed here. But it still just isn't really the same.

I think security is my number one concern, but it's a concern with Linux, too. Despite the zealotry, Linux security is hard to do well. Sure, you don't have to worry about worms as much, but in all honesty if someone were deliberately aiming for my machine, can I be sure it would hold up? Probably not. That's not to say one can't do Linux security; by dint of being open source, I have a plethora of options like PaX, GRSec, and SELinux to choose from. But I don't personally think many Linux users are as ``secure by default'' as they might think.

Stability might be a close second, but I've had some complaints with OS X (which I've only been using for a few months) and my experiences with WinXP show it to be a big improvement in that regard over previous versions.

Familiarity, then, is what takes the cake. On a UNIX-ish system, I am at home. On Windows? ``Where can I find the button to do this?''

As a developer...

[Pivot]

I find myself much more productive in a Linux / Unix environment. Linux is just much more user friendly for me.

Well...

[xcham]

Shoddy business practices, nerve-wracking battles with the Control Panel (I'd much rather deal with /etc thank you) and a long history of instability crises. That and UNIXish environments are much more conducive to development work, I find.

I do know that WinXP is much less crash prone than stuff I was using years ago, before I made the switch, but I just use what works. GNU/Linux is a pretty good power user's desktop platform. And of course, the price is right.

Re:More propoganda from a linux company

[mrwonton]

The irony in them asking their readers why they use Linux and not Windows? I don't think thats irony, but thanks Alanis.

Usability among many other reasons

[drgonzo59]

Among the obvious reasons such as security and stability I also like the usability aspect of linux. I know, I know, Bash me all you want. For me, Linux is more user friendly than Windows. I like the command line, the config files in plain text that I can edit, and the choice of window managers (I use BlackBox, I like its simplicity). As someone said, "the only intuitive interface is the nipple, everything else is learned" most people consider Windows user friendly because they were trained to use only windows.

Control

[Khazunga]

Thinking about it, the word Control sums it up. I keep on Linux, because I know what the system is doing, why it is doing it, and I can fix it if my setup doesn't behave. Every one of my windows boxes degrades over time, and I have no idea why. Before I switched, I'd love the feel of a freshly installed windows box: snappy, clean, everything in place. Now, my linux install keeps on and on feeling like the day I installed it: fast, predictable, secure.

So, I keep on Linux, because I like retaining control over my computer.

Microsoft Software as a Whole

[artlu]

I am a hardcore Mac user back from the old days, but I gave up on Apple for a few years. OS Lineage for me: Mac->Win3.1->Win98->Debian->Debian->XP->OSX. However, my mac is not perfect and some mundane CPU intensive tasks such as Stock Streamers, just run better on XP. Recently, I got the sasser virus on my XP laptop before I knew what it was, and then, I did a clean install. Because of work (Oracle Programming and Stock Stuff), I am still forced to use windows, but at home, my windows laptop is never even touched.

On the other hand, if you look at Microsoft Software as a whole, there are some great applications. I absolutely love the new office for OSX, and microsoft Project for windows has virtually no competition - even from Oracle. Truly, XP has come a long way from the 98SE crash fest, but the fact that Microsoft leaves the systems wide open is never good.

Im not an M$ fan, but you have to admit, that if they get their act together, we could be in for some trouble. Even from my OSX world.

On a side note, I want to plug a new site that I just made live. If you are interested in Day trading or the stock market check it out: Group Shares.com.

Thanks,
Aj

My reason: Customization Options

[Gortbusters.org]

Ok, the reason I use Linux primarily [at home] is just the options it provides (for free).

- Evolution for getting all of my personal mail and OO-ximian for all of my office needs (very simple at home).
- Gentoo to compile and make my old hardware still useful
- Less chance for viri/worms and it's easier to see what's going on, or what was installed. Same goes for adware and spyware.
- Theme options are much better, much more choices and all for free. All windows themes require clunky third party packages that are slow, and some of them cost money (i.e. the ones you would really want to use).

For a development environment, I don't see a big difference other then that Linux is our production system and developing on Windows just means more testing. There are some nice development tools, but work won't even pay for them so that's not a reason to use linux over windows (or vise versa).

At work, I do use Windows -- because everyone else does, and every time I try to switch (OO, ximian connector, etc).... there are always little wrinkles that I don't have time to deal with. At home, I have more flexibility.

Oh yes, I also now use Xbox for all my gaming so I don't care if linux game support isn't that great.

Bang for the Buck!

[Interested Guy]

My OS desisions are based soley on bang for the buck. I keep a windows box around because I can devop simple data apps in Microsoft access faster than I can with anything on Linux.

I use linux mostly. Because I can't beat the bang for the buck on most every other application. I love using Quanta plus.

All of the other bonuses are nice. I like the freedom to look and figure out how something works. (or doesn't work)

I like the added security of evading the Worms and Viruses that plague Windows. Most of the plagues are avoided with a small amount of expense and a fair amount of common sense, so those are not a determining factor.

For the public Good.

[h4rm0ny]

I stay off Windows where possible, because it is better for society to have a strong competitor to Microsoft. Without the choice of other OS's Windows would be a poorer and more expensive product.

Furthermore, OSS ensures greater trust is possible. We can verify the source code. With Microsoft, we cannot do this and without a strong competitor they would have less incentive to keep things clean.

I use Linux, in short, because it prevents too much power accumulating with one small group.

Also, it's free and more versatile.

Several reasons

[gurps_npc]

1) Price 2) Viruses that target it 3) Bugs that they delay fixing 4) Anger at their arrogance and refusal to support a company that mistreats their customers 5) Less Hangs on Apple/Linux

Re:The fact that it is so difficult to administer.

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Tasks that are trivial under Unix, have thus far eluded me. I still don't know how to set up DNS under Win2K.

"I know how to do it" does not equal "This is trivial."

Setting up DNS on UNIX is quite complex. Whole books have been written on the subject.

Setting up DNS on Windows Server is no more complex than it is on UNIX. Whether it's simpler is a matter for argument. Personally, I think it's much simpler. But at the very least, it's no more complex. Just different.

But let's not talk about things like setting up DNS, a task that one person in a hundred thousand will have to do once every five years. Let's talk about things like sending and receiving instant messages.

No usable shell.

[mo]

I'm doing a lot of network debugging and the lack of a proper command line is just infuriating. For example, I've got a laptop with two ethernet ports that I plug into various machines to sniff traffic and test network configs with commands like:

ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.2
route add default gw 192.168.0.1
ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0 up promisc
tethereal -i eth1
dhclient eth0
httpd -X &
echo -ne "GET / HTTP/1.0\r\n\r\n" | nc localhost 80

Now, granted this stuff can all be done on windows (and a lot of the commands are ported to windows) but a lot of it requires clicking into random dialog boxes. It's so much faster to hit control-r 'dhcli' and get a previous command, or even roll a few common sequences into a shell script (or a one-liner that I just hold in the history buffer). Perhaps this is just my ignorance of windows command-line abilities (it seems everything I want to do on windows is done by the 'net' command for some reason), but there's just so much more depth with a real unix shell.

Mac OS X - quality which Microsoft can never match

[markv242]

Ever since I switched, I realized just how much more intuitive the Apple designers / engineers really are. Microsoft has adopted the shotgun-like style of "throw a million options in front of the user and let them decide" when, 99% of the time, users don't want to decide, they just want their damned machine to work.

Honestly, who at Microsoft thought this was a good idea: "Start / Settings / Control Panel / Add/Remove Hardware / Next / Uninstall/Unplug a device / Next / Unplug/Eject a device / Next / Select device / Next"

...when the Apple engineers tell you: "Unplug the device from your Macintosh."

I'm easy

[veg]

I like an easy life. Free from Application errors, licence numbers, bugfix delays, unexplained crashes and unpredictability. Linux, BSD, Darwin and Inferno behave as they should, as one would expect, and according to the manual. If they don't, then it's a bug and it gets fixed.
I like knowing my systems are going to stay up, and if they should ever fail, which in general they don't, I'd like to know they'll be fixed asap without me having to take the blame and pay.

Open source makes the world a better place.

Re:I'm easy

[killjoe]

I don't think you can understate the freedom of not having to keep license numbers handy.

I work in a large corporation and we have to get requisitions for every purchase. If the requisition is for over $500 it has to go to further up the chain. If it's over a $1000.00 it has to go to the CIO!. It's a royal pain in the ass to get anything, it takes weeks sometimes and you have to fill out a ton of paperwork.

If I need something I always look for an open source alternative first. No requisitions, no begging, no justifying why you want to spend $500 for some software, no hassles. Just go get it, if it does what you need then you are done. If it does not do what you need then you fill out the paperwork and try to get some piece of software approved and pray it works.

Here's the short list...

[Foofoobar]

- lack of cross platform compatibility
- OS lockin through products or development languages (SQL Server, C#, etc)
- poor security
- poor stability
- code bloat/ excessive functionality
- lack of choice; choices are forced down your throat on install
- no built in firewall or other security features
- closed environment that cannot be modified
- want to do everything for you

I like choice and Microsoft doesn't. That's pretty much it.

Well, I'll give an honest answer

[digitalgimpus]

My reasons:

- Slow bloated feel
- Awkward UI
- Buggy
- Insecure, always virus concerns
- Expensive
- Everything takes 10 clicks.

Mac OS X showed me how great an OS can feel
- Smooth slim feel
- UI feels right (can't explain it much better than that)
- never crashed
- software update is nice and elequent, pretty secure.
- inexpensive ($129 isn't to bad)
- minimal clicks.

Overall: Higher quality, gets my vote every time. Windows is just an inferior product.

Hate Pirating

[magictongue]

I would say that I'm cheap (or perhaps I just hate wasting money) and I don't believe in pirating software. Most people that I know who are loyally committed to Windows pirate a great deal of their software. It bothers me that someone would dismiss Linux and praise Windows but will not pay for Windows or Windows apps. Also, if a "free" application is just as good as a "non free" application its logical to pick the free version. Even when the "free' version is not as good it still makes sense to pick it if it meets your needs. Let face it, I eat more ground beef than filet mignon even though the filet mignon is better. It is simple economic logic. I bet if someone could end all pirating of software it would not be long before the majority of people where using Linux.

Re:What keeps me off?

[banzai51]

Steve fucking Balmer: a man whose wobbling, flabby, sweating body is a testament to corporate greed

Ahhh, so you are evaluating your software based on looks of the people in the company? Wow. Can it get any more closed minded than that?

Re:I stay off of windows because it sucks!

[PhoenixFlare]

Then I made the mistake of connecting to windows update... Suddenly all my programs started crashing,

Perhaps there was a specific issue with one of the patches and another piece of software you had installed? I find it extremely hard to believe that your entire system would begin to constantly crash for some unknown reason.

If you're savvy enough to use SSH and VNC and all that, why didn't you at least educate yourself about the updates a bit before installing them?

Yes, some of the patches have caused problems that were not disclosed or known beforehand, but this is relatively rare, and you can generally either uninstall the patch or fix whatever issue it has caused.

the windows on the desktop would pick a stacking order and not be convinced to alter it,

This is so inane, it's funny. What, you couldn't figure out how to move through/around your various program windows? Give me a break...You sound like one of those people that equates everything they don't understand about computers to ghosts or magic or something.

Windows may have some odd quirks, but unless you're infected with a virus or trojan or have some extremely rare issue that i'm not aware of, your program windows do not pick screen positions and refuse to move.

and the new and improved active-X made all of my favorite games (diablo) unusable.

Utter rubbish.

First of all, what you're referring to in this context would be DirectX, not "active-X".

Secondly, your claim that it suddenly made all your games stop working is even more laughable. More specifically, i've been using Diablo, Diablo II, and Lord of Destruction under 3 different versions of DirectX (including the most current) over the years with absolutely no problems at all. So have thousands and thousands of other people.

I cannot recall more than one or two old non-DOS-based games that do not work now, and several that new DirectX versions actually improved.

Oh yeah, I occasionally boot windows to see how crappy my various websites render under IE.

God, could you be any more determined to ignore and twist the facts to suit your ranting?

I'll help you out on this one - if you don't like IE, try this. Works as good or better than IE for pretty much everything except Shockwave and Flash. There's a Windows version of Mozilla, too. And Opera.

So final answer: I keep off windows because it sucks. Also I do not want to support an abusive monopoly.

Judging from the complaints you bring up, I find it extremely hard to believe you have used Windows recently, if at all.

Feel free to respond, I have a feeling i'd enjoy it.

Re:I'm cheap...

[cshark]

I prefer Linux because I can do more with it.

I like KDE better than Windows XP. It's a better desktop with more features that are easier to tweak and fix if something goes wrong.

I'm starting to play with XFCE. I like that too.

The command line actually has real unadulterated power under Linux!

I like the fact that there isn't a central monolithic registry that can take the entire system down.

I prefer Mozilla to IE. Always have.

My kids like the games that come with KDE and GNOME. They're colorful and fun, and they whine when I tell them they have to use the XP box in the other room for homework.

I like the fact that my nine year old can't break it... no matter how hard she tries...

I like the fact that my wife can't install software on my desktop when she's not logged in as me.

I like Linux because I never have to worry about the status of my license, or installing it on multiple machines.

I like the fact that I can set up a grid or a series of thin clients throughout my house without much real work.

I like the fact that my internet connection is faster under Linux than it was under Windows XP. It's a real kick. If you have both running side by side, try comparing them sometime.

It's nice that Linux will run (granted with a little work) on my prehistoric 486dx2.

It's nice that Linux doesn't have 19 system processes that report to the Microsoft mother-ship for no good reason at all, that can't be turned off.

It's nice that there's so much useful documentation on Linux out there. No matter what problem I'm having, the Linux community has documented just about everything incredibly well. And they never ask how helpful they were when they were no help at all. That's nice too.

Linus is slightly less evil than Gates.

And the fact that it's free, or at least mostly free doesn't hurt either.

Re:Once you go Free, you'll never go back

[Gorath99]

Pretty much my story too. I've used MS since DOS3. Never really got into *nix, as for a long time I had no way to try it out (no internet) and once I did get a chance to try it out on a Solaris machine, I found it sorely disappointing (CDE annoyed the heck out of me and I didn't know any of the CLI commands).

Then about 18 months ago I had to work on a Redhat desktop for a couple of months. I took some time to learn to use the CLI commands and eventually got hooked.

When I installed Mandrake at home, I set the machine up to boot into Windows by default. After only two weeks or so I noticed that I pretty much always chose to boot linux instead, so that became the default. Stayed that way ever since.

Why do I keep away from Windows? Two things mainly.

1) Pretty much everything I do except playing games and making PowerPoint presentations (OO.org is great, but Impress presentations don't always look perfect in PowerPoint, which I have to use for the actual presentation) can be done just as easily or more easily under linux.

2) I'm in charge of linux. Linux doesn't try to dictate how I should use my computer. If I don't like the windows manager, I can choose another one. If I would like to have feature X in program Y, I can file a wishlist or make the modifications myself if I can. If I want to get rid of some program I dislike, linux won't try to stop me. Etc. etc.

And of course the price is really nice too, but that's not as big a selling point to me as those other 2 points, since I can get cheap/free copies of Windows programs for most things that I need to do (student license for MS-Office, eclipse, JDK, MiKTeX, etc.)

Re:Mac OS X - quality which Microsoft can never ma

[dasmegabyte]

Actually, what ticks me off is that Windows makes it easier to unplug a device incorrectly than it does to do so correctly.

On Windows, if I want to eject my iPod or my camera, I have to click unplug device. Then I have to click the device i want to unplug. Then I have to select the device. Then it tells me I'll also be turning off the filesystem on the drive (duh). Then is asks if I'm sure. Then it tells me it ejected okay.

That's 4 windows opened. If I just pull the cable, I only get one window. Guess which one I do?

On Mac OSX, if I jack the plug on my iPod or my camera, I get a single message telling me I did something stupid and probably screwed my file system (whcih, on the camera, i probably did). If I drag it to the trash, or click the eject button over the volume in the finder, and i'm not using a file on the drive, it ejects and doesn't even give me a window. It becomes LESS of a hassle to do it right!

Development

[bltfast32]

I use it because Windows is completely closed. I love programming and Linux makes it easy to screw around with (screw up?) anything.

Heck, Windows doesn't even ship with QuickBasic anymore. They've certainly made it clear you aren't welcome to explore (unless you have several hundred for VS.NET).

Too bad too; I think a lot of youth are missing out on the excitment of programming because of this too. I don't think MS is really interested in fostering more programmers. They have the ones they feel they need.

So anyways - like I said before I started rambling. I love to program and I'll never run out of possibilities with Linux so I love it. I'm like a kid in a candy store.

It motivates me to participate and grow.

BTW - I can relate to 'easier to diagnose problems' argument too.

Microsoft won't allow me

[noldrin]

Microsoft refuses to allow me to run MS Windows. This is because I can't agree to their EULA.

Far more to it than that

[AllenChristopher]

Competition also opens up new markets. The whole online music thing was really kicked off by Apple, right? There were others first, but Apple made it a daily reality.

If Microsoft had CRUSHED Apple years ago, that wide-open market wouldn't be there for Microsoft to grab... they'd have to have thought of it themselves, implemented it, gotten it to sell.

The advantage of competitors is that your competitors do some of the foot-work for you, take some of the risks for you. What you want to do is wait until the copmetitor has made a new product work, then beat their product.

Of course, that's what Microsoft is so good at...

UNIX Command line

[Hyperbolix]

Having worked for an ISP for some time now, I have grown accustomed to using vim, sed, awk, grep, and a variety of other tools. I utilize command shells for practically everything (force of habit,) and I am actually more error prone in a drag/drop environment than using a command line. I'm extremely unhappy with the quality of the Windows 'cmd' command line interface. At this point, the only use I have for Windows is to play the everpopular first person shooters, for which I dual boot. I dislike the lack of remote control in windows. I'd really like to be able to SSH in and do everything from a command prompt that I could do with the normal interface, but the Windows XP Telnet interface is crippling. There is something quite inflexible about Windows, and I find it disturbing. When I leave home, I must check to make sure my dual booting system is running in Linux (the default,) or I won't be able to access it from elsewhere. Diverse filesystem access is also lacking, as I can access my NTFS partition read-only from Linux, but I cannot access my EXT3 partition at all from Windows. I think that just about sums it up.

Windows free for 3 years

[bryanthompson]

I've been off of windows for 3 years. I have 3 Redhat machines and just bought a PowerBook last week. The main reason for me to not swtich from Windows was that I couldn't give up all of the games. These days I have one windows machine that I use for Battlefield.

The main thing keeping me from going back to windows is that I realize that I don't need windows to do what I want. I'm happy coding java in vim and NOT having lockups. The alternative software is getting better, and for most everyone OpenOffice or AbiWord will do whatever they want. Evolution is one of the best email apps I've used, except for Mail.app now. But, it's just that I know I don't have to use windows that's keeping me away from it.

I bet there's a lot of people here who would seriously switch completely to Mac or Linux if they could give up their games, or get different games. Frozen Bubble is only really entertaining for the first few weeks. As far as doing real work like websites and java, anything BUT windows is the way to go.

Re:What keeps me off?

[killjoe]

Maybe no looks but it's a metaphor. Balmer, Gates, Alchin etc are very slimy people who run a slimy company that does slimy things.

To me the fact that MS paid ADTI to write a book sliming Linus and open source is reason enough to shun them. Add to that funding SCO, paying the likes of Enderlee and DiDio to publish bogus research and the thousands of other sleazy tactics.

To me It's important to support companies who act ethically. I realize that every dollar I spend can either make the world a better place or a worse one. I don't buy GM modified food, I don't buy Microsoft.

Wrong question?

[john82]

Rather than ask amongst Slashdot users "What keeps you off of Windows?", perhaps we should ask the rest of the computing public a much more interesting question.

What keeps you off of Linux?

The first question merely allows us to puff out our collective chests and bleat for the rest of the assmbled throng. Then we nod appreciatively at our confirmation of the "obvious". Tell it brother!

But why don't more people use Linux or BSD (and their collective assortment of redheaded step-children)? What aren't we doing right that there isn't greater acknowlegement of the beneifts outlined in countless posts here. The question is not that far removed from the ease with which some snake oil salesman from the land of de Tocqueville is able to con the masses about Linux and Open Source.

Open Source and Linux need a really good PR guru that can get our voice heard. A few shouts in the wilderness ain't doing the job.

Then again, maybe we need to spend more time on improving this mouse trap so the world will beat a path to our door.

Re:Wrong question?

[SplendidIsolatn]

What keeps me off Linux, I'll tell you, and no, I'm not trying to put this off as flamebait.

I have been a computer geek type since I was old enough to sit and type. I have been working with computers for over 20 years in one fashion or another, so while I might not be a guru on them, I know what I'm doing. So when I built my own computer in the fall of 2002, I decided to install Mandrake Linux (what was available at the store) to give it a whirl. Biggest mistake I ever made.

First off, the 'easy' installation took me hours to do, then it decided to keep freezing once I got it running. Then one thing stopped working after another, and I was spending more time trying to figure out what was wrong than spending time using my computer. I deleted the installation, put Windows XP home on the PC, firewall, anti-spyware, hell, I'll even download firefox or something. My windows PC WORKS FOR ME AND DOES WHAT I NEED IT TO DO. Nothing anyone could say about Linux after my experience with Mandrake will change that. I have a working PC that maybe crashes once a month. I can live with that and buying WinXP rather than spending hours cruising through message boards to figure out why my modem drivers weren't working correctly (and yes, I had to do that)

In short, Linux might be right for some people. For me and what I wanted, it was wrong, and I don't plan on going back. To the Linux zealots (not Linux users), add up the amount of time that you've spent having to 'tweak' something that you wouldn't have to do in Windows (and downloading patches doesn't count -- I do that while reading Slashdot). Multiply those hours by whatever dollar emount you choose and see what value you've had to spend on Linux. It's probably a lot less than an XP install.

Sorry if this offends any Linux people, but my experience is my experience and I can't change it.

Peace

Re:Wrong question?

[digitect]

My family uses Fedora Core 2 at home as the sole OS. Here's a list of broken things that would keep me from convincing my work (Architectural firm) to use it:

• Broken printing. I always feel lucky when printing Just Works. Using it with image viewers and file manager thumbnail collections seem a distant fantacy.
• No CMYK support. (Yeah, it's related to printing, but there aren't apps that can even managing it for authoring, let alone output.)
• Poor/non-existant GL support. (Even possible given proprietary hardware?)
• No serious 3D CAD application. This is a huge industry hanging out in Windows before it can adopt Linux. IMO, PythonCAD is the best Free CAD software effort at the moment, but it is hardly Alpha and at least five years away from serious CAD work.
• Slow GUI. Linux still feels slower than Windows, regardless if the processor work is twice as efficient.
• Flakey sound support. Like printing, I'm always pleasently surprised when my sound works across applications and levels seem balanced.

That's the big item list for me. If all these ever get solved, the Windows platform will either be down for the count or headed there.

Re:Wrong question?

[debest]

You're not wrong. Linux, as much as it is developing quickly (and it is, if you're feeling the urge just download a newer distro sometime and try it again), it still doesn't stand up to your criteria. You still have to hack with your system to a degree that Windows does not require.

Your comment on the time required to tweak something is also spot on, in so far as these activities are generally rare in the Windows world. The tweaking, however, is *exactly* what most Linux users get a charge out of. Using an OS which is infinitely customizable, with dozens of options for most any type of application you can imagine, is appealing to many people (present company included).

Re:I'm cheap...

[Trinition]

do not give me the batch file crap, batch does not do regex or any of that stuff, nor can I pipe my outputs and inputs

Actually, you can pipe inputs and outputs in batch. However, batch is in fact dead. Years ago, Microsoft devised the Windows Scripting Host to replace it, and it is very very nice. You can run it in GUI mode or command line. It supports RegEx as well as any scripting-enabled COM component (including a lot of standard Windows calls).

Re:Question about article summary

[jedidiah]

As much as some people like might to whine about the theoretical security problems of Linux, the fact still remains that it is WinDOS boxes that get rooted and turned into spam gateways.

End users shouldn't have to be neurotic about applying security patches and they shouldn't have to fear email attachments.

This is strictly the Microsoft engineering mentality at work.

Fortunately, we have Linux and Apple.

Wow, 1084 comments and counting.

[What'sInAName]

Wow, I haven't even bothered to read any of the other comments, and I'm sure I'm going to add nothing new here, but the reasons keep growing by the day.

I started my computing career on an Apple //c, an incredibly open archetecture, and I just got used to being able to twiddle with things any way I wanted. I still remember a few of the hex codes for assembly lang. instructions (Ex: 0x20 = JSR, 0x60 = RTS,...)

My Apple broke and for a few years, I didn't have a home computer (gasp!) Of course, at the time I was working as a programmer, so I got plenty of computer time. I quit my job and went back to grad school and decided I wanted a computer. By this point I had heard about the *BSDs and this thing called Linux, and since I decided I loved Unix so much, I thought that I would give Linux a spin.

Of course, I had a dual boot machine at this point. I liked playing with Photoshop (this was in the days before GIMP) and a few other Windows apps, but I couldn't help the feeling of being... restrained. W95 was fun to play with at first, but I was frustrated by the fact that there was only so much you could tinker with. I was a math grad student, and so the fact that TeX was installed by default helped me to stay in the Linux environment most of the time. I played a few games in Windows, but for the most part, Linux was my choice. Viri were around at that point, but they were a relatively minor nuisance, compared to today. And spam? Hadn't really been invented yet. Ahhh, to be able to go back to those days....

Well, to cut a long, rambling post shor.... well, never mind, way too late for that. (Note: Quantity of single malt scotch is directly proportional to length of posts/e-mails.) At this point, it works like this: Every time I turn around, I find another reason not to use Windows. At the end of the day, as much as I love Linux, I'm still not one to slobber over it and denounce Windows; it just seems so childish to do so. On the other hand, I love Unix/Linux so much, and administering said systems, that I've decided to make a career switch to system administration, despite all the outsourcing/bad economy/whatever.

Linux is great technology, and it isn't just the technical part that is great. It's the people. The people I know who are into Linux and Unix are , by and large, enthusiastic about what they do, and that just makes it so much more fun for me. There are of course Windows admins/users like this, but I've met so many pissed off/frustrated ones that it just brings me down.

Oh well, that's my 2 cents (ok, more like four bucks) worth.